Rating: 
Summary: An Origin Story
Review: I didn't get this movie the first time I saw it. The whole experience seemed, like the boy robot itself, manipulating, poorly conceived, and ultimately a waste of technology, skill, and money. This was at odds with the skill of the director, so I saw it a second time, and then I "got it." The genre of this movie is "origin story." Look at it the way you would look at Adam and Eve, Moses, Romulus and Remus, even Plymouth Rock. The story should be imagined being told by a future race of robots, not the beings in the second time period of the movie, but thousands of years later. Then, and probably only then, does the elements of the movie come together. This boy being "the first," undertaking a perilous journey. The state of the world (a mess) when it was created. The mixed view of the makers (humans) as both brilliant and horrid. The ending being the equivelant of Moses never making it to the promised land.
If you buy this view, the movie makes tremendous sense, although the inability of Spielberg to frame the movie such seems more unforgivable.
Rating: 
Summary: Too bad for the last twenty minutes
Review: All of my friends told me A.I. was okay and that they wished they'd turned it off 20 minutes before the end of the movie. When I finally got around to watching it (I really trust my friends' opinions) I thought, "Hey, it can't be that bad, I'll just keep watching." I should have listened to them. The entire movie up until that point truly has some redeming qualities; the special effects, the moral dilemma, the controversy, etc. Alas, had I not watched the last twenty minutes I could almost call this a good movie. Had they chose to end the story when he throws himself into the water, I would have walked away saying the movie was thought provoking. Now all I can say is the movie is nauseating.
Rating: 
Summary: My favorite movie of all time!!!
Review: I have seen hundreds of movies, they are my life, I own 60 DVD's and almost 100 VHS's. And after watching all of them I can definitely say that A.I. is what i think to be the best movie ever made. The stroy is so complex and clever. Nothing is left undone, it's perfect. A lot of people say that they hated it but a lot of Americans are stupid and close-minded. They want everything given to them on a silver platter. They don't want to think about the movie or think about its messages. It is perfectly acted and looks great. SEE IT!!! My other faves are Mulholland Drive (or anything by David Lynch), The Game, American Beauty, Princess Mononoke, and tons more.
Rating:
Summary: "I'm Sorry I didn't tell you about the World"
Review: It's hard to understand A.I. I didn't want to see the film when it first came out, well, because I was maybe bored with Spielberg and his creatures. I dont know, I really couldn't say why I didn't want to see the film I just didn't want to see it. Although I am fascinated with Spielberg.
After seeing A.I, it's safe for me to say I felt depressed and probably would never have wanted to see it again. But I bought it because I got so attached to Monica and I hated how David lost her and then found her again only to lose her once more. HOW SAD!!!You almost get the feeling that he never truly found his mommy. That she remained lost forever and all that he had was a memory of her. You almost get the feeling that the last words she truly told him was "I'm sorry I didn't tell you about the world." How truly sad the world is.
Rating: 
Summary: dont waste your time
Review: must have been one of the worst movies i've ever seen...and i've seen a lot of them
Rating:
Summary: Simply one of the best films ever.
Review: The movie is long, slow, and is always pushing you someplace, only you find out that when you get there it's not where you thought you would end up. But I keep coming back to the sadness. It's not the type of downer sadness that pushes those buttons that films find so alluring, but rather it deals with death in a way that gives meaning to death. Not in the usual way of "rebirth" or even alluding to God and a new existence (another form of "rebirth", anyway) but rather absolute and final ENDING which has a beautiful closure and brings nobility to fatalism. I wasn't crying for the loss of things, but rather for the acknowledgement of truth. That being that even though life is a futile attempt at happiness, and is in a constant state of decay and entropy, when all is said and done maybe there is hope that even though things are not eternal, at least beauty and meaning can be experienced while life is still present.
Rating: 
Summary: Superb 1st act¿ then, filmmakers fall asleep at the wheel.
Review: This film is unlike any other. Rarely has there been a film that began so masterfully both technically and artistically, only to decompose into an amalgam of illogical writing and seriously flawed cinematography. Despite this criticism, the acting in this film is first-rate, particularly by William Hurt and Haley Joel Osment. There are concerns over some of the casting decisions made for the voice-only actors as well as concerns with the dialog for some of the characters in the second act (although the actors did a splendid job portraying the characters - several characters simply seemed out of place in this film). To get a better idea of what was going on in this film, it is necessary to look at the three acts individually. Act One: Again, this act is nothing short of sublime. The ebb and flow of tension created by both the narrative and editing is masterfully achieved. The extent of unease that the audience feels is rarely established in other films and is only occasionally reached by some of Kubrick's own films. Numerous questions are raised in the first act, and it is clear that Steven Spielberg is making a film that does not intend to insult the viewer's intelligence. The composition of each shot is flawless as well as thoughtfully edited. The musical score is quiet and is incorporated into all of the scenes logically without being pedantic. Although the use of CGI often detracts from films when it is not judiciously included, (needless to say, this misuse occurs quite frequently in other pictures), the use of CGI in this act, although not always necessary, is subtle and is not at all out of place. The only objection is the choice for the voice of Teddy. He sounds too grandfatherly. Even the choice for the voice of the Hal 9000 computer in 2001, for example, was too emotional sounding although it was less of a departure from ideal than is the voice of Teddy. Act Two: Unfortunately, despite everything that has been achieved up until this point, the first evidence of the unraveling cinematic technique becomes apparent. The first problem is the character Gigolo Joe. Jude Law is magnificent as this character, however, the personality and behavior of the character does not fit the tone of the rest of the film. Simply put, he is too goofy and does not behave in a likely manner. In addition, the character does not move the plot forward at all from his introduction to his inexplicable disappearance. Gigolo Joe is as important to this film as the "lime in the coconut" song is to the film Practical Magic. The next issue is that the pace of the film begins to go haywire (not unlike the whole of Practical Magic). It doesn't make sense for a film whose first 45 minutes is serious cinema to turn into an ADD festival. The composition of shots goes into George "Throw-everything-possible-into-the-frame-so-the-new-Star-Wars-trilogy-becomes-a-hit" Lucas mode. The CGI is excessive, and the score gets too raucous, which raises an interesting question: What happened to the music from Der Rosenkavalier? This music was dramatically recomposed. Often this is done to fit the music into a time constraint or to add something that the original is lacking when it is necessary. Although the recomposed music has a good beat and is easy to dance to, it is not apparent why the recomposition is necessary. In fact, the score for the second act is way off base, and would have worked better even if the Der Rosenkavalier music in its original from (though edited for length, obviously) was the only music used throughout the entire act. One final point, when a well-known actor plays a major role in a film, it is often effective because there is enough material presented by that actor to wash away associations with other roles that the actor has played in previous films. However, when a well-known actor plays a cameo in a film, the effect is not only comedic, but also parodistic. Robin Williams' and Chris Rock's cameos are comedic, and that was probably the intention. However, the side effect, which was either not intended, or worse, foolishly intended, was that of parody, e.g., F. Abraham Murray's appearance in Last Action Hero. Of course, Last Action Hero is a parody, so in that film, F. Abraham Murray's role makes sense. Act Three: The director had to make a choice of what to do tie up the film. Luckily, the second act improved after the arrival to the underwater Manhattan. The film would have been partially saved if it had ended after the protagonist arrived in Coney Island as the plot was already fairly tied up. However, the epilogue, which became another act, destroyed the integrity of the work. The various illogical plot elements of this act will not even be mentioned here. The biggest problem was the flash forward into a sequence that looks to have been made by a different group of filmmakers altogether. In fact, while first watching the video, the question of whether or not the main feature had been recorded over some other longer "direct to video" feature that hadn't been completely recorded over arose. Alas, because there are no movies titled Ice Pirates: This Time it's Personal or Close Encounters of the Sixth Kind, this sequence really was intended to be part of Artificial Intelligence. It does not improve the incredulity of this act that Ben Kingley's voice is distinctive and highly recognizable. Finally, the use of narration is awkward as the beginning of the film has no narration nor does the rest of film. Best to either use narration consistently, or use none at all. In conclusion, this film was disappointing since it had so many elements of classic films, but the departures in the second act and the failure to conclude with a short logical epilogue irrevocably compromises the overall structure of the work.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best films of 2001!
Review: I know that people have loved this film or hated this film. There seems to be no middle ground. I personally loved this film. I enjoyed every moment of David's journey through the human world. Throughout the whole film it gave me many thought provoking questions. What makes a person human? Is man going to be build technology which will ultimately be his own downfall in the end??? The question posed to the audience by this film was how can love? Haely Joel Osment was robbed of an oscar for his performance in this film. He is by far the best child actor, better than many adult actors also. I get annoyed by people who bad mouth this film, if you didn't understand that is one thing, but making a bad comment about something you do not understand is stupid, oh well ignorance is bliss for a lot of people!
Rating:
Summary: Just Plain Bad
Review: You would actually think that a movie by both Steven Spielberg and Stanley Kubrick would be a classic.Well,this movie proves you wrong because both Steven Spielberg and Stanley Kubrick worked on this movie.This movie is pathetically awful. And that little kid did a boring job too... No wonder this movie flopped in it's third week(dropping from #3 all the way down to #9).Save your money and spend it elswhere because if you are expecting this movie to be a classic because two famous directors worked on it,you are going to be proved wrong.Hope this review was of help. Peace Out.
Rating:
Summary: Not for everyone, apparently
Review: About 10 family members of mine saw this show at the theater and the overwhelming verdict was not to waste my time with it. Five of them thought it was the worst movie they had ever seen. I had to see for myself, thank goodness. I thought this film was beatifully made, brilliantly acted, and (this is where others vehemenently disagree) had a wonderfull storyline.
|
